Liposomal bupivacaine versus conventional anesthetic or placebo for hemorrhoidectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Liposome bupivacaine (LB) is a long-acting anesthetic to enhance postoperative analgesia. Studies evaluating the efficacy of the LB against an active comparator (bupivacaine or placebo) on acute postoperative pain control in hemorrhoidectomy procedures are few and heterogeneous. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing LB's analgesic efficacy and side effects to conventional/placebo anesthetic in hemorrhoidectomy patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials investigating the use of LB after haemorrhoidectomy. We searched the literature published from the time of inception of the datasets to August 19, 2022. The electronic databases included English publications in Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and Scopus. RESULTS: A total of 338 patients who underwent a hemorrhoidectomy procedure enrolled in three randomized clinical trials were included. The overall mean age was 45.84 years (SD ± 11.43), and there was a male predominance (53.55% male). In total 194 patients (52.2%) received LB and 144 (47.8%) received either bupivacaine or placebo. Pain scores at 72 h in the LB (199, 266, and 300 mg) were significantly lower than in the bupivacaine HCl group (p = 0.002). Compared to the bupivacaine/placebo group, the time to first use of opioids in the LB group was significantly longer at LB 199 mg (11 h vs. 9 h), LB 266 mg (19 h vs. 9 h), and LB 300 mg (19 h vs. 8 h) (p < 0.05). Moreover, compared to the bupivacaine/epinephrine group, it was significantly lower in the LB 266 mg group (3.7 vs. 10.2 mg) and at LB 300 mg (13 vs. 33 mg) (p < 0.05). Finally, regarding adverse effects, the conventional anesthetic/placebo group reported more pain in bowel movement than LB groups (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.31-5.16). CONCLUSIONS: Comparing LB to conventional anesthetic/placebo anesthetic for hemorrhoidectomy, we found a statistically significant reduction in pain through 72 h, decreased opioid requirements, and delayed time to first opioid use. Moreover, the conventional anesthetic/placebo group reported more pain in bowel movement than LB groups.

Comparison Of Analgesic Efficacy of Continuous Perineural Catheter, Liposomal Bupivacaine, And Dexamethasone as An Adjuvant For Interscalene Block In Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Triple Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Interscalene catheters (ISC) are considered as the gold standard for perioperative pain control after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for interscalene blocks (ISB) or the addition of dexamethasone to ISBs have both presented as additional options for extended analgesia. We aimed to compare the efficacy of LB to a single shot ISB (SISB) with added dexamethasone to an ISC. We hypothesized that a single injection of LB or an ISB with a dexamethasone will provide non-inferior duration and quality of analgesia compared to ISC. METHODS: A single centered triple blinded randomized controlled trial evaluated patients undergoing elective primary TSA. Patients were randomized to 3 groups, Group A (control): 0.5% bupivacaine 15 ml with a rescue catheter left in situ (0.125% bupivacaine infusion), Group B: 0.5% bupivacaine 14 ml with 4mg (1 ml) dexamethasone with a catheter left in situ (saline infusion), Group C: 10 ml of liposomal bupivacaine (133 mg) with 0.5% bupivacaine 5 ml, with a catheter left in situ (saline infusion). The primary outcome was the worst NRS (numeric rating scale) measured on arrival to PACU, 6 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, and 36 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes recorded were time to first analgesic request, intraoperative opioid consumption, total inpatient opioid consumption, arm weakness, arm numbness, time of analgesia duration, time of motor recovery, sensory testing using pinprick on POD1, Q36, Q48, hand strength assessment using dynamometer POD1, Q36, Q48, PACU and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: We analyzed 72 patients in 3 groups (Group A 24, group B 24, Group C 24). The pre-surgery physical function scores were similar between groups. The change in postoperative pain was not different among the three groups. All 3 groups demonstrated an increase in the postoperative values, a change that was not statistically significant between groups. Likewise, no difference in the mental function score was seen within or between groups. No differences in sleep quality or satisfaction were seen among groups (P values 0.405 and 1.00, respectively). No adverse events were reported in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference was demonstrated between a single injection ISB with dexamethasone, a LB injection and an ISC. Given the equivalence in analgesia provided with these three modalities, providers should carefully consider the option that best fits each patient. Thus, a single injection of LB or single injection of bupivacaine with dexamethasone provides similar analgesic efficacy compared to ISC.

Single-shot interscalene block with liposomal bupivacaine vs. non-liposomal bupivacaine in shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Regional anesthesia is a valuable component of multimodal pain control in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), and multiple interscalene block anesthetic options exist, including nonliposomal interscalene bupivacaine (NLIB) and liposomal interscalene bupivacaine (LIB). The purpose of this study was to compare pain control and opioid consumption within 48 hours postoperation in those undergoing TSA with either LIB or NLIB. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study at a single academic medical center including consecutive patients undergoing inpatient (>23-hour hospitalization) primary anatomic or reverse TSA from 2016 to 2020 who received either LIB or an NLIB for perioperative pain control. Perioperative patient outcomes were collected including pain levels and opioid usage, as well as 30- and 90-day emergency department (ED) visits or readmissions. The primary outcome was postoperative pain and opioid use. RESULTS: Overall, 489 patients were included in this study (316 LIB and 173 NLIB). Pain scores at 3, 6, 12, and 48 hours postoperatively were not statistically significantly different (P > .05 for all). However, the LIB group had improved pain scores at 24 and 36 hours postoperation (P < .05 all). There was no difference in the incidence of severe postoperative pain, defined as a 9 or 10 numeric rating scale-11 score, between the 2 anesthesia groups after adjusting for preoperative pain and baseline opioid use (odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 0.57-2.74; P = .57). Overall, 99 of 316 patients receiving LIB (31.3%) did not require any postoperative opioids compared with 38 of 173 receiving NLIB (22.0%); however, this difference was not statistically significant after adjusting for prior opioid use and preoperative pain (P = .33). No statistically significant differences in postoperative total morphine equivalents or mean daily morphine equivalents consumed between the groups were found during their hospital stays (P > .05 for both). Finally, no significant differences were found in 30- and 90-day ED visits or readmission rates (all P > .05). CONCLUSION: LIB and NLIB demonstrated differences in patient-reported pain scores at 24 and 36 hours postoperation, although these did not reach clinical significance. There were no statistically significant differences in opioid consumption during the hospital stay, including opioid use, total morphine equivalents, and daily mean morphine equivalents consumed during the hospital stay. Additionally, no differences were observed in 30- and 90-day ED visits or readmission rates.

Liposomal bupivacaine provides superior pain control compared to bupivacaine with adjuvants in interscalene block for total shoulder replacement: a prospective double-blinded, randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Optimal pain control methods after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) achieve reduced opioid consumption, shortened hospital stay, and improved patient satisfaction in addition to adequate analgesia. Interscalene brachial plexus block is the gold standard for TSA, yet it typically does not provide pain relief lasting beyond 24 hours. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) purportedly provides prolonged analgesia, yet it has been minimally explored for interscalene block, and it is significantly more expensive than standard bupivacaine. METHODS: This is a prospective, 2-arm, double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Subjects presenting for anatomic or reverse TSA were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive interscalene brachial plexus block with either LB plus bupivacaine (LBB group) or bupivacaine plus dexamethasone and epinephrine (BDE group). The primary outcome was 120-hour postoperative opioid consumption. Secondary outcomes were pain scores up to 96 hours postoperatively, pain control satisfaction, complications, level of distress from block numbness, and hospital stay. RESULTS: Ninety patients, 45 per group, were included in the intention-to-treat analysis and randomized. Because of withdrawal of consent and loss to follow-up, 40 in each group completed enrollment through postoperative day 60. Total 120-hour postoperative opioid consumption was similar between groups (P = .127), with no differences within 24- or 48-hour time intervals. Postoperative pain scores at 24-48 hours, 48-72 hours, 72-96 hours, and day 60 were significantly lower for the LBB group. DISCUSSION: LB interscalene brachial plexus block before total shoulder arthroplasty did not reduce 120-hour postoperative opioid consumption but significantly reduced postoperative pain between 24 and 96 hours and at postoperative day 60.

A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Assessing Intraoperative Anesthetic Therapies for Analgesic Efficacy and Morphine Consumption Following Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare intraoperative anesthetic therapies for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) regarding postoperative analgesic efficacy and morphine consumption by conducting a systematic literature search. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials of TKA using various anesthetic therapies were identified from various databases from conception through December 31, 2021. A network meta-analysis of relevant literature was performed to investigate which treatment showed better outcomes. In total, 40 trials were included in this study. RESULTS: Surface under the cumulative ranking curve showed local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) with saphenous nerve block (SNB) to produce the best pain relief on postoperative days (PODs) 1 and 2 and the best reduction of morphine consumption on PODs 1 and 3. However, femoral nerve block showed the largest effect on pain relief on POD 3, and liposomal bupivacaine showed the largest effect on reduction of morphine consumption on POD 2. CONCLUSIONS: According to this network meta-analysis, surface under the cumulative ranking curve percentage showed that LIA with SNB provided the best analgesic effect after TKA. Furthermore, patients receiving LIA with SNB had the lowest consumption of morphine. Although femoral nerve block resulted in better pain relief on POD 3, LIA with SNB could be selected first when trying to reduce morphine consumption or increase early ambulation.

Erector Spinae Plane Block With Liposomal Bupivacaine: Analgesic Adjunct in Adult Pectus Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Pain management may be challenging in patients undergoing pectus excavatum (PE) bar removal surgery. To enhance recovery, opioid sparing strategies with regional anesthesia including ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB) have been implemented. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of bilateral ESPB with a liposomal bupivacaine/traditional bupivacaine mixture as part of an enhanced patient recovery pathway. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of adult patients who underwent PE bar removal from January 2019 to December 2020 was performed. Perioperative data were reviewed and recorded. Patients who received ESPB were compared to historical controls (non-ESPB patients). RESULTS: A total of 202 patients were included (non-ESPB: 124 patients; ESPB: 78 patients). No adverse events were attributed to ESPB. Non-ESPB patients received more intraoperative opioids (milligram morphine equivalents; 41.8 ± 17.0 mg versus 36.7 ± 17.1, P = 0.05) and were more likely to present to the emergency department within 7 d postoperatively (4.8% versus 0%, P = 0.05) when compared to ESPB patients. No significant difference in total perioperative milligram morphine equivalents, severe pain in postanesthesia care unit (PACU), time from PACU arrival to analgesic administration, PACU length of stay, or postprocedure admission rates between groups were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PE bar removal surgery, bilateral ESPB with liposomal bupivacaine was performed without complications. ESPB with liposomal bupivacaine may be considered as an analgesic adjunct to enhance recovery in patients undergoing cardiothoracic procedures but further prospective randomized clinical trials comparing liposomal bupivacaine to traditional local anesthetics with and without indwelling nerve catheters are necessary.

Sternotomy Wound Infiltration With Liposomal Versus Plain Bupivacaine for Postoperative Analgesia After Elective Cardiac Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Poor pain control after cardiac surgery can be associated with postoperative complications, longer recovery, and development of chronic pain. The authors hypothesized that adding liposomal bupivacaine (LB) to plain bupivacaine (PB) will provide better and long-lasting analgesia when used for wound infiltration in median sternotomy. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, and double-blinded clinical trial. SETTING: Single institution, tertiary care university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients who underwent elective cardiac surgery through median sternotomy. INTERVENTIONS: A single surgeon performed wound infiltration of LB plus PB or PB into the sternotomy wound, chest, and mediastinal tube sites. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were followed up for 72 hours for pain scores, opioid consumption, and adverse events. Sixty patients completed the study for analysis (LB group [n = 29], PB group [n = 31]). Patient characteristics, procedural variables, and pain scores measured at specific intervals from 4 hours until 72 hours postoperatively did not reveal any significant differences between the groups. Mixed-model regression showed that the trend of mean pain scores at movement in the LB group was significantly (p = 0.01) lower compared with the PB group. Opioid consumption over 72 hours was not significantly different between the 2 groups (oral morphine equivalents; median [interquartile range], 139 [73, 212] mg in LB v 105 [54, 188] mg in PB, p = 0.29). Recovery characteristics and adverse events were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: LB added to PB for sternotomy wound infiltration during elective cardiac surgery did not significantly improve the quality of postoperative analgesia.

Interscalene block vs. periarticular liposomal bupivacaine for pain control following reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Interscalene nerve blocks and local anesthetic infiltration are 2 methods commonly used in multimodal analgesia regimens for shoulder arthroplasty. Liposomal bupivacaine is a novel anesthetic that can be detected more than 24 hours following local administration. Studies comparing liposomal bupivacaine with conventional analgesic methods have found mixed results regarding pain and narcotic consumption, and there is little information available regarding patient satisfaction and the role of psychosocial variables. METHODS: This is a randomized study of 76 adult patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty who were assigned to receive a preoperative interscalene nerve block with ropivacaine (Block = 38) or an intraoperative periarticular injection of liposomal bupivacaine (Local = 38). The primary outcomes were narcotic consumption (MEq, morphine equivalents), visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, and satisfaction (0-10). The secondary outcomes were the effect of patient group preference (Block vs. Local) and psychosocial variables (Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Brief Resilience Scale) on satisfaction. Length of stay, pain-related phone calls, pain-related readmissions, and the number of narcotic refills were tracked from the day of surgery through the first postoperative appointment, which was routinely 7-14 days following surgery. RESULTS: Intraoperative and day 0 narcotic consumption was lower in the Block group by 17.3 and 21.6 MEq (P < .001, P = .035) with no differences on day 1 or 2. There was no difference in VAS pain scores, length of stay, pain-related phone calls, pain-related readmissions, or the number of narcotic refills. Patient satisfaction was higher in the Block group (8.3 vs. 6.8, P = .017). Pain catastrophizing, resilience, and patient group preference did not have any significant relationship with patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty have higher satisfaction with a conventional interscalene block compared to a periarticular injection of liposomal bupivacaine. There were no clinically important differences in narcotic consumption, VAS pain scores, length of stay, pain-related phone calls, pain-related readmissions, or the number of narcotic refills. The Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Brief Resilience Scale, and patient preferences did not have any relationship with patient satisfaction.

Comparison of Femoral Nerve Catheter, Adductor Canal Catheter, and Periarticular Liposomal Bupivacaine Infiltration for Postoperative Analgesia After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve catheters are used to provide analgesia after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and have been shown to decrease pain and opioid use, to facilitate participation with physical therapy (PT), and to hasten discharge. More recently, pericapsular infiltration using liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has been employed as an alternative analgesic approach. METHODS: This retrospective study compared outcomes for three analgesic approaches: femoral nerve catheter (FNC), adductor canal catheter (ACC), and intraoperative LB infiltration. The primary outcome was numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores at 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included pain scores at 12, 36, and 48 hours, time-to-first opioid, cumulative opioid use, distance walked, and time-to-discharge. RESULTS: Pain scores at 24 hours were significantly lower in both the ACC and FNC cohorts when compared to the LB cohort (3.1 versus 4.6 [P = .017] and 2.4 versus 4.6 [P < .0001]). The ACC and FNC groups did not differ significantly at that timepoint (P = .27). Similar comparisons were found at 12 and 36 hours, while at 48 hours the FNC group was superior. Time to first opioid and opioid consumption favored the ACC and FNC groups. Walking distance favored the ACC group. Both the ACC and LB groups had a faster time-to-discharge than the FNC group. CONCLUSION: Both ACCs and FNCs provided superior analgesia at 24 hours compared to LB, while being equivalent to each other. Pain scores at 12 hours and 36 hours as well as opioid consumption through 48 hours mirrored this finding. Although various differences were found between groups in terms of time-to-first analgesic, walking distance and time-to-discharge, the ACC approach appeared to optimally balance analgesia, ambulation, and time-to-discharge.

Evaluating the Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Postoperative Pain Management for Rhinoplasty: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Rhinoplasty, a leading cosmetic surgical procedure, often involves the use of opioids for postoperative pain management. This raises concerns due to potential opioid side effects and overprescription. Liposomal bupivacaine offers a promising alternative, but its efficacy in rhinoplasty remains under-investigated. This study assesses the impact of liposomal bupivacaine on postoperative pain and opioid consumption following rhinoplasty. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on patients undergoing rhinoplasty between January 2014 and September 2020. Postoperative pain scores were assessed at intervals up to 16 h, and opioid consumption was monitored. Patients were stratified into two groups: those receiving postoperative liposomal bupivacaine (Group 1) and those who did not (Group 2). RESULTS: No significant disparities in demographics or surgical specifics were identified between groups. Group 1 consistently reported lower pain scores, notably at 30 min (1.4 vs. 3.7, p = 0.0006) and 2 h (2.2 vs. 3.38, p = 0.0417). Cumulatively, Group 1's average pain score was 2.4, significantly lower than Group 2's 3.4 (p = 0.0023). Group 1 also demonstrated reduced opioid consumption, with oxycodone and oral morphine equivalent (OME) intake being notably lower (p = 0.005 and p = 0.0428, respectively). CONCLUSION: Liposomal bupivacaine presents as an efficacious alternative for post-rhinoplasty pain management, reducing both perceived pain and opioid consumption. While promising, the findings necessitate validation through larger, prospective studies considering the inherent limitations of this preliminary investigation. This study evaluates the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine as a pain management strategy in postoperative care for rhinoplasty and septorhinoplasty procedures, with the potential to reduce reliance on opioids. The findings indicate that patients receiving liposomal bupivacaine experienced significantly lower pain scores postoperatively and less overall opioid consumption, thereby enhancing patient comfort and safety. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

The effect of liposomal bupivacaine for surgical wound infiltration: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has consistently been considered a potential analgesic for surgical wound infiltration. However, the evidence of its analgesic effectiveness remains unclear. In this meta-analysis, we attempted to identify the potential clinical role of LB wound infiltration in different surgical procedures. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LB with non-liposomal local anaesthetics and placebos were retrieved from six electronic databases. The primary outcome was cumulative morphine equivalent consumption within 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery. Approximately 2659 patients from 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to the control, LB-wound infiltration did not reduce the postoperative morphine consumption at 24 hours (weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.60 mg; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], -2.78 to 1.59 mg; P = 0.54), 48 hours (WMD, -1.00 mg; 97.5% CI, -3.23 to 1.24; P = 0.32) or 72 hours (WMD, 0.50 mg; 97.5% CI, -0.67 to 1.67; P = 0.33). Similarly, secondary outcome analysis did not reveal any additional benefits of LB in any other pain-related outcomes. LB was not associated with any adverse effects. Overall, LB does not appear to improve the postoperative analgesic, rehabilitation, or safety outcomes. Current evidence does not support the routine use of LB for wound infiltration following surgical procedures.

Liposomal bupivacaine reduces opioid requirements following Ravitch repair for pectus excavatum.

Background and Aims: The management of post-operative pain after surgical repair of pectus excavatum with the Ravitch procedure is challenging. Although previous studies have compared various methods of pain control in these patients, few have compared different local anesthetics. This retrospective analysis compares the use of bupivacaine to its longer-acting form, liposomal bupivacaine, in patients who had undergone pectus excavatum repair with the Ravitch method. Material and Methods: Eleven patients who received local infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine were matched to 11 patients who received local infiltration utilizing bupivacaine with epinephrine. The primary outcome was total morphine milligram equivalents per kilogram body weight (MME/kg) over the complete length of hospital stay. Secondary outcomes included total cumulative diazepam, acetaminophen, ondansetron, and NSAID dose per kilogram body weight (mg/kg) over the course of the hospital stay, chest tube drainage (ml/kg body weight), number of post-operative hours until the first bowel movement, Haller Index, patient request for magnesium hydroxide, average pain scores from post-operative day 1 to post-operative day 5, and length of hospital stay. Continuous variables were reported as medians with inter-quartile ranges, and categorical values were reported as percentages and frequencies. Results: The total MME/kg [1.7 (1.2-2.4) vs 2.9 (2.0-3.9), P = 0.007] and hydromorphone (mg/kg) [0.1 (0.0-0.2) vs 0.3 (0.1-0.4), P = 0.006] use in the liposomal bupivacaine group versus bupivacaine with epinephrine was significantly reduced over total length of hospital stay. Similarly, there was a reduction in diazepam use in the liposomal bupivacaine group versus the bupivacaine group [0.4 (0.1-0.8) vs 0.6 (0.4-0.7), P = 0.249], but this did not reach statistical significance. The total dose of ondansetron (mg/kg) was not statistically different when comparing the liposomal bupivacaine group to the bupivacaine group [0.3 (0.0-0.5) vs 0.3 (0.2-0.6), P = 0.332]. Interestingly, the total dose of acetaminophen (mg/kg) was statistically increased in the liposomal bupivacaine group compared to the bupivacaine with epinephrine group [172 (138-183) vs 74 (55-111), P = 0.007]. Additionally, the total chest tube drainage (ml/kg) was significantly reduced in the liposomal bupivacaine group [9.3 (7.5-10.6) vs 12.8 (11.3-18.5), P = 0.027]. Finally, the percentage of patients without requests for magnesium hydroxide to promote laxation was significantly higher in the liposomal bupivacaine group than in the bupivacaine group (63.6% vs 18.2%, P = 0.027). Conclusion: The use of liposomal bupivacaine for local infiltration in patients who undergo the Ravitch procedure for pectus repair offers advantages over plain bupivacaine, including reduced opioid consumption and opioid-related side effects. However, more data are needed to understand the significance of these findings.

Real-World Data on Liposomal Bupivacaine and Inpatient Hospital Costs After Colorectal Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: This study compared costs of care among colorectal surgery patients who received liposomal bupivacaine versus those who did not (control) from a health institution perspective. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This pharmacoeconomic evaluation was conducted among adults undergoing open or minimally invasive colorectal resection at an academic medical center from May 2016 to February 2018. Healthcare resource utilization was derived from the electronic health record. Total cost of care (2018 USD) was analyzed using a generalized linear model adjusted for American Society of Anesthesiologists score, enhanced recovery after surgery management, open surgery, opioid use before surgery, height, cancer, and age. The primary analysis used public costs. A sensitivity analysis used internal costs from the hospital to maximize internal validity. RESULTS: Of 486 included patients, 286 (59%) received liposomal bupivacaine. Total cost of care using public costs included perioperative local anesthetics (mean ± standard deviation [SD]: $392 ± 74 liposomal bupivacaine versus $8 ± 13 control), analgesics within 48 h after surgery (mean ± SD: $132 ± 99 liposomal bupivacaine versus $117 ± 127 control), postoperative ileus management (mean ± SD: $5 ± 51 liposomal bupivacaine versus $65 ± 284 control), and hospital length of stay (mean ± SD: $4459 ± 3576 liposomal bupivacaine versus $7769 ± 7082 control). Liposomal bupivacaine was associated with an adjusted absolute difference in total cost of care of -$1435 (95% confidence interval -$2401 to -$470; P = 0.004) using public costs and -$1345 (95% confidence interval -$2215 to -$476; P = 0.002) using internal costs. CONCLUSIONS: Use of liposomal bupivacaine in colorectal surgery was associated with a significant reduction in total cost of care that was predominately driven by reduced costs for hospital stay and postoperative ileus management despite higher medication costs.

Efficacy of Liposomal Bupivacaine for Sternotomy Pain After Cardiac Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia is a cornerstone of postoperative pain management. Different formulations of local anesthetics are available. Data to support these treatment options are limited. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine compared with bupivacaine or ropivacaine in patients undergoing sternotomy for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and/or valve surgery. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective, observational study at a community teaching hospital. Patients included were 18 years of age or older undergoing CABG and/or valve surgery via median sternotomy and received either liposomal bupivacaine or an active comparator. The primary outcome was opioid utilization in morphine milligram equivalent (MME) from 0 to 72 hours. RESULTS: A total of 376 patients were included, 223 in the liposomal bupivacaine arm and 153 in the active comparator arm. There was no difference in the MME use from 0 to 72 hours among patients in the liposomal bupivacaine group compared with the comparator group (114.2 mg [75.55] vs 107.6 mg [68.4], P = 0.38). After Bonferroni correction, there was no difference in pain scores at individual time points. At 24- and 48-hour post-op, pain scores were higher with liposomal bupivacaine at 4.4 (2.7) vs 3.5 (2.8) (P = 0.01) and 3.1 (2.9) vs 2.4 (2.6) (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Based on these findings and previous studies, liposomal bupivacaine should not be routinely used for CABG and/or valve surgery through a median sternotomy given lack of superiority. This helps inform surgical practice to the role of anesthetics as part of the multimodal analgesia regimen.

Liposomal Bupivacaine Versus Immediate-Release Bupivacaine for Postoperative Pain Control.

BACKGROUND: Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is increasingly being used for postoperative pain control, but there are conflicting efficacy data when compared with immediate-release bupivacaine (IRB). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative efficacies of LB and IRB for postoperative pain control in order to assess the formulary status of LB at our institution. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective, institutional review board-approved, noninferiority matched cohort study at a tertiary care academic medical center. Adult surgical patients admitted for >24 hours who received LB or IRB were included. The primary outcome was total opioid consumption within 24 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included total opioid consumption within 72 hours postoperatively, nonopioid analgesic use within 24 and 72 hours postoperatively, time to rescue analgesic use, and postoperative length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: A total of 326 patients were included in the matched cohort. Median 24-hour opioid consumption was significantly lower in the IRB group compared with the LB group (81 mg [30, 153] vs 103 mg [46, 241]; P = 0.01). Patients receiving IRB compared with LB also had a decrease in total opioid consumption 72 hours postoperatively (110 mg [45, 258] vs 165 mg [68, 402]; P = 0.005) and shorter postoperative LOS (2.8 days [1.7, 4] vs 3.3 days [2, 5.1]; P < 0.001). There was no difference in time to rescue analgesic use. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Across a variety of surgical procedures, administration of IRB compared with LB was associated with a reduction in total opioid consumption within 24 and 72 hours postoperatively and shorter LOS in adult surgical patients.

Transversus abdominis plane blocks for complex abdominal wall reconstruction decrease hospital length of stay compared to epidurals.

BACKGROUND: Complex abdominal wall reconstruction for ventral and incisional hernias can be quite painful with prolonged length of stay (LOS). There are a variety of options to manage post-operative pain after a ventral hernia repair, including epidural catheters, transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks, and intravenous narcotic pain medications (IVPM). We hypothesized that TAP blocks with liposomal bupivacaine decrease the LOS compared to epidurals and IVPM. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent an open ventral hernia repair with retromuscular mesh between 2016 and 2020 was conducted. LOS was used as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included post-operative pain and 90-day post-operative complications. RESULTS: An epidural was used in 66 patients, a TAP block with liposomal bupivacaine in 18 patients, and IVPM in 11 patients. The epidural group was noted to have a significantly longer duration of surgery (251.11 vs. 207.94 min; P < 0.05) and larger area of mesh (461.85 vs. 338.17 cm2; P < 0.05) when compared to the TAP block group. Hospital LOS was significantly shorter for the TAP block group compared to the epidural group (4.22 vs. 5.62 days; P < 0.05). There were no differences in post-operative complications between the groups. The epidural group reported significantly lower post-operative day one (POD1) pain scores measured on a 10-point scale, compared to the IVPM and TAP block groups (5.00 vs. 6.91 vs. 7.50; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients who received a TAP block for post-operative pain management had a significantly shorter length of stay compared to those patients who received an epidural. While the TAP block group reported higher POD1 pain scores, they did not have a significant difference in post-operative complications. TAP blocks with liposomal bupivacaine should be considered for post-operative pain control in complex ventral hernia repairs.

Will the Use of Intraoperative Liposomal Bupivacaine During Thumb Carpometacarpal Arthroplasty Decrease Postoperative Use of Opioids? A Prospective Randomized Study.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the use of intraoperative local injection of liposomal bupivacaine to decrease opioid use in the early postoperative period for patients undergoing outpatient thumb carpometacarpal joint arthroplasty. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded study was designed to compare 2 groups of patients for opioid use, pain scores, and nonopioid pill consumption within 5 days after surgery. The investigational group received an intraoperative injection of 10 ml (133 mg) liposomal bupivacaine. The control group received no local anesthetic. All patients were anesthetized with a standardized supraclavicular nerve block and were prescribed equal amounts of oral narcotic analgesic. Outcomes were assessed by collecting the data from postoperative patient-reported diaries. RESULTS: The experimental group reported a significantly lower total opioid consumption for the 5 days after surgery. Daily opioid use, as measured by both opioid pill equivalent count and morphine milligram equivalent in addition to postoperative pain scores and nonopioid pill consumption, was not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative injection of liposomal bupivacaine was shown to decrease total opioid intake during the 5 days after thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.

Interscalene block with liposomal bupivacaine versus continuous interscalene catheter in primary total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal pain regimens in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) now include regional anesthetic techniques. Historically, regional anesthesia for extended postoperative pain control in TSA was administered using a continuous interscalene catheter (CIC). Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is used for its potential for similar pain control and fewer complications compared with indwelling catheters. We evaluated the efficacy of interscalene LB compared with a CIC in postoperative pain control for patients undergoing TSA. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary-care academic medical center including consecutive patients undergoing primary anatomic or reverse TSA from 2016 to 2020 who received either single-shot LB or a CIC for perioperative pain control. Perioperative and outcome variables were collected. The primary outcome was postoperative pain control, whereas the secondary outcome was health care utilization. RESULTS: The study included 565 patients, with 242 in the CIC cohort and 323 in the LB cohort. Demographic characteristics including sex (P = .99) and race (P = .81) were similar between the cohorts. The LB cohort had significantly lower mean pain scores at 24 hours (3 vs. 2, P < .001) and 36 hours (3 vs. 2, P < .001) postoperatively. The CIC cohort showed a higher percentage of patients experiencing a pain score of 9 or 10 postoperatively (29% vs. 17%, P = .001), whereas the LB cohort had a significantly greater proportion of opioid-free patients (32% vs. 10%, P < .001). Additionally, a greater proportion of CIC patients required opioid escalation to patient-controlled analgesia (7% vs. 2%, P = .002). The CIC cohort experienced a greater length of stay (2.3 days vs. 2.1 days, P = .01) and more 30-day emergency department visits (5% vs. 2%, P = .038). CONCLUSIONS: LB demonstrated lower mean pain scores at 24 and 36 hours postoperatively and lower rates of severe postoperative pain. Additionally, LB patients showed significantly higher rates of opioid-free pain regimens. These results suggest that as part of a multimodal pain regimen in primary shoulder arthroplasty, LB may provide greater reductions in pain and opioid use when compared with CICs.

Nerve block with liposomal bupivacaine yields fewer complications and similar pain relief when compared to an interscalene catheter for arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Following orthopedic surgery, patients frequently experience pain and discomfort. Multiple methods of regional anesthesia are available; however, the optimal technique to adequately manage pain while minimizing complications remains under investigation. This study aims to compare the complication rates and pain relief of single-injection, liposomal bupivacaine brachial plexus nerve block to a conventional, indwelling ropivacaine interscalene catheter (ISC) in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We hypothesize that liposomal bupivacaine will have fewer patient complications with similar pain relief than an indwelling catheter. METHODS: Patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery were prospectively assessed after randomization into either ropivacaine ISC or single-injection liposomal bupivacaine brachial plexus nerve block (LB) arms. All patients were discharged with 5 analgesics (acetaminophen, methocarbamol, gabapentin, acetylsalicylic acid, and oxycodone) for as-needed pain relief. Preoperatively, patient demographics and baseline Visual Analog Scale, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and Penn Shoulder Scores were obtained. For the first four days postoperatively, complication rates (nausea, dyspnea, anesthetic site discomfort and/or irritation and/or leakage, and self-reported concerns and complications), pain, medication usage, and sleep data were assessed by phone survey every 12 hours. The primary outcome was overall complication rate. At 12 weeks postoperatively, Visual Analog Scale, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and Penn scores were reassessed. Outcome scores were compared with Mann-Whitney U tests, and demographics were compared with chi-squared tests. Significance was set at P < .05. RESULTS: A total of 63 individuals were allocated into ISC (N = 35) and in the LB arms (N = 28) for analysis. Demographics and preoperative patient-reported outcomes were not different between the arms. Patients in the LB arm experienced fewer (13.1%) overall complications than those in the ISC arm (29.8%) (P < .001), with patients in the ISC arm specifically reporting more anesthetic site discomfort (36.4% vs. 7.1%, P = .007), leakage (30.3% vs. 7.1%, P = .023), and 'other,' free-response complications (ISC: 21.2%; LB: 3.6%; P = .042). No differences were noted in pain, sleep, opioid use, or satisfaction between arms during the perioperative period. More nonopioid medications were consumed on average in the ISC (1.8 ± 1.4) than in the LB arm (1.4 ± 1.3) (P = .001), with greater reported use of acetylsalicylic acid (40.9% vs. 23.4% P < .001) and acetaminophen (69.5% vs. 59.6% P = .013). Patient-reported outcome scores did not differ between groups preoperatively or at 12 weeks. DISCUSSION: Patients receiving liposomal bupivacaine experienced fewer complications than traditional ISCs after arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Analgesia, sleep, satisfaction, and functional scores were similar between the 2 groups.

Efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine for pain control in shoulder surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Total shoulder arthroplasty and rotator cuff repair surgery result in considerable postoperative pain. Optimal postoperative pain management based on a multidisciplinary approach is necessary to promote early postoperative rehabilitation. The purpose of this study was to compare liposomal bupivacaine (LB) with traditional, non-LB agents after total arthroplasty or rotator cuff repair surgery. METHODS: Two independent authors searched the PubMed Central, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library websites for suitable articles. We included randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes after the administration of LB and non-LB agents for rotator cuff repair or total shoulder arthroplasty. The outcome measures for our meta-analysis were visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at 24 and 48 hours after surgery, opioid consumption 24 and 48 hours after surgery, hospital stay duration, and complications within 48 hours after surgery. We used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) tool to assess the degree of evidence for the outcomes, and we used the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: The current meta-analysis comprised 11 randomized controlled studies with 846 subjects. Seven studies used local infiltration to administer LB, and 3 used a block. Our pooled analysis results showed no significant difference in VAS pain scores at 24 hours after surgery (standardized mean difference [SMD], -0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.55 to 0.01; prediction interval, -1.25 to 0.70), VAS pain scores at 48 hours after surgery (SMD, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.46 to 0.09; prediction interval, -1.10 to 0.73), opioid consumption at 24 hours after surgery (SMD, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.27 to 0.34; prediction interval, -1.01 to 1.09), and opioid consumption at 48 hours after surgery (SMD, 0.10; 95% CI, -0.44 to 0.64; prediction interval, -1.76 to 1.96) between the LB and non-LB groups. The LB and non-LB groups had similar hospital stay durations (SMD, -0.38; 95% CI, -1.51 to 0.74; prediction interval, -14.7 to 13.9) and adverse events (risk ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.42 to 1.36) following the shoulder procedures. The level of evidence was low according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) analysis. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis provides evidence indicating that LB is similar to non-LB agents in terms of overall pain relief and opioid requirements. The duration of hospital stay and complication rates were also similar in the 2 groups. Future well-designed and adequately powered randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm our results and to be able to recommend LB for various types of shoulder operations.